1. The Client’s Crisis

While talking with a kindergarten-aged boy, the client’s child got into rough play, and in the course of that, an unintended act of sexual harassment occurred. Since the other child did not show any discomfort or refusal at the time, the client’s child believed it had simply been dismissed as mutual horseplay. However, after returning home, the other child told his parents about the play, and when the parents heard it, they requested punishment for child sexual harassment, which led to a juvenile protection case. The guardian, feeling helpless and frightened at the possibility that their child could receive a juvenile protective disposition, requested a consultation with Law Firm Jonjae.

2. Key Issues

The difficulty in this case was largely threefold. First, there was the seriousness of the charge itself, sexual harassment. Even if it involved children, once the matter was formally filed as sexual harassment, there was a possibility that a juvenile protective disposition would be imposed. Second, whether the client’s child had intent to commit sexual harassment was at issue. The incident occurred during conversation and rough play, and the other child did not show any refusal at the time; however, it was true that physical contact ultimately took place. Third, if a protective disposition were imposed, it could affect the child’s future, so obtaining a non-disposition decision was essential.

3. Jonjae’s Strategy

Managing Attorney Yoon Ji-sang carefully reviewed the facts of the case through consultation and helped establish a specific response strategy that could lead to a non-disposition decision.

First, we emphasized that the sexual harassment incident was extremely minor. Since it occurred during play and conversation between the two children, we guided them to actively assert that the client’s child did not realize their actions could cause discomfort to the other child.

At the same time, we helped present concrete evidence that the client’s child was sincerely remorseful toward the victim, and through an overall review of the child’s school life, peer relationships, home environment, and the guardian’s attention and ability to provide protection, we assisted in preparing materials showing that a protective disposition was not necessary.

4. Outcome and Recovery

The court comprehensively considered the circumstances of the case, its minor nature, the child’s remorse, and the home environment, and determined that a protective disposition was unnecessary, issuing a non-disposition decision. The client’s child was able to return to everyday life without any prior protective-disposition record.

Attorney in Charge: Managing Attorney Yoon Ji-sang

For confidentiality protection, this case has been partially de-identified to the extent that it does not undermine the essence of the case.